FeedHQvsWallabag
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| FeedHQ | Wallabag | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 43/100 | 73/100 |
| Rank in category | #57 of 85 in Feed Reader | #4 of 46 in Bookmarks & Link Sharing |
| GitHub stars | 578 | 13 033 |
| Stars, last 30 days | — | +50 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 1 |
| Latest release | — | 2.6.15 · 28 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | BSD-3-Clause | MIT |
| Main language | Python | PHP |
Which one should you pick?
Wallabag scores 73/100 against 43/100 for FeedHQ, so it is the safer default.
Wallabag ships more often: 1 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for FeedHQ.
If you want the quickest setup, Wallabag is easier to run; FeedHQ needs more configuration.
Wallabag is growing faster right now (+50 stars in 30 days).
FeedHQ details →Wallabag details →